50mm f/1.4 Canon vs. Sigma

[Jesse]

I currently have the Canon version and while sometimes it takes amazing images, a lot of the time I find it's super soft or just misses focus. I also own the 85mm f/1.8, which I find to be much sharper and hits focus a lot more often, so it's not me having a focus issue.

My question is, would it be worth switching to the Sigma version? I'm mostly worried about it not having the creamy bokeh that the Canon version has because the Sigma is a much sharper lens.

Example of when I hate this lens:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/jesseherzog/14892121262/

Focus is off and image is super soft. Not a fan of the bokeh in this either.

Examples of when I love this lens:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/jesseherzog/15083888055/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/jesseherzog/10998659386/

 

[jdramirez]

We are talking about the original sigma, not the art, right. Dogs your body have auto focus micro adjust?

I never shot the Canon 50 below f2.8, so I'm a marginal resource l at best... but the old Sigma would be poor with afma because the lens needed more than 20 units of afma...

The art has problems with peripheral auto focus points... and the Canon is soft wide open. So it's a give and take.

The 85mm might just be a good match with your body... manufacturing tolerances...

 

[Jesse]

No I'm talking about the new art lens

 

[Marsu42]

I currently have the Canon version and while sometimes it takes amazing images, a lot of the time I find it's super soft or just misses focus. I also own the 85mm f/1.8, which I find to be much sharper and hits focus a lot more often, so it's not me having a focus issue.

No surprise, the infamous 50/1.4 doesn't even have a "real" usm motor but just a crappy micro-usm.

No I'm talking about the new art lens

You're actually asking if a €900 Sigma with 77mm from 2014 is an upgrade vs a €300 58mm Canon from 2005?

 

[Jesse]

Not asking if it's an upgrade, asking if it'a worth it and asking which has the better looking bokeh.

 

[Jesse]

No to mention the Sigma is more than double the price and size.

 

[Jesse]

Found my answer here though: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-50mm-f-1.4-DG-HSM-Art-Lens.aspx

 

[Marsu42]

Not asking if it's an upgrade, asking if it'a worth it and asking which has the better looking bokeh.

As always, "worth it" has to be a trade of between your budget and the Sigma's performance - but ignoring this factor, the newer lens blows the Canon out of the water in every aspect and then some (bokeh depends on the lens' diameter - 58mm vs. 77mm ...).

 

[Viggo]

Yes, it's one of the biggest improvements you'll ever see within the same focal length and aperture. Buy it!

 

[mkabi]

Example of when I hate this lens:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/jesseherzog/14892121262/

Focus is off and image is super soft. Not a fan of the bokeh in this either.

Examples of when I love this lens:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/jesseherzog/15083888055/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/jesseherzog/10998659386/

Which lens is used in the above pictures? The sigma or canon?
And as everyone else have asked, have you AFMA'd the curent Canon 50mm that you have?

 

[raptor3x]

You're actually asking if a €900 Sigma with 77mm from 2014 is an upgrade vs a €300 58mm Canon from 2005?

The Canon is from 1993.

 

[Policar]

How is the autofocus on the 50mm Art?

I have the 50mm f1.8 Canon (love it wide open) and the 50mm f1.4 Sigma from long ago... it is a surprisingly sharp lens with great smooth bokeh, but the autofocus is awful! Likewise the 18-35mm f1.8 is dodgy... but surprisingly irks on my 5D Mark III just not crop bodies.

Worries me. I'm ready to spring for the Sigma but want to see if anything better from Canon comes out first.

 

[drmikeinpdx]

I'm in the same boat, but I currently have the Sigma 50 classic (non art) that is rather soft wide open, has great bokeh, but seems to have a random number generator built into the autofocus processor. Or maybe a Gremlin that has good days and bad days. Well, maybe not quite that bad, but you can bet I shoot twice as many images as normal to make sure I get enough that are properly focused.

I'm waiting to see if user reports indicated an improvement in autofocus accuracy and consistency for the Sigma in the next few months. But I'm also waiting, without much hope, for Canon to expand their lineup of primes with IS to include a 50mm lens.

 

[raptor3x]

How is the autofocus on the 50mm Art?

I have the 50mm f1.8 Canon (love it wide open) and the 50mm f1.4 Sigma from long ago... it is a surprisingly sharp lens with great smooth bokeh, but the autofocus is awful! Likewise the 18-35mm f1.8 is dodgy... but surprisingly irks on my 5D Mark III just not crop bodies.

Worries me. I'm ready to spring for the Sigma but want to see if anything better from Canon comes out first.

I found that the AF on the 50 Art is excellent on the 5D3 if you're using the central dual cross points, but not so great with the other points.

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

I have Canon 50mm F1.4 USM, and I also have the Sigma Art. After a few days with the Sigma, I see that my Canon does not deserve to be named as F1.4, for I am forced to use it at F2.8 to achieve the same quality that the Sigma Art wide open.

My Sigma has a slight front focus, which is easily solved with AFMA. Some people report inconsistent focus, but it can happen to any model of any brand. I enjoyed the bokeh of Sigma Art, and was a huge upgrade for me. Look at this comparison between the Canon 50mm L, and the Sigma 50mm Art.

http://willchaophotography.com/sigma-50mm-f1-4-art-review/

 

[FTb-n]

I, too, am waiting for Canon to refresh the 50 1.4 with IS like they did with the 28 and 35. Although, its the optical quality improvements that I'm really waiting for. Canon's latest introductions from the 70-200 Mark II (ok, a few years old now), to the 24-70 Mark II, the 40 2.8 pancake, and the 35 2.0 IS have been impressively sharp wide open. Canon needs a 50 that's also sharp wide open and they don't have one.

Since "The Year of The Lens" is passing quickly, my hope is dwindling. So, for the first time, I've started to consider Sigma. I'm looking forward to the evolution of this thread.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

I, too, am waiting for Canon to refresh the 50 1.4 with IS like they did with the 28 and 35. Although, its the optical quality improvements that I'm really waiting for. Canon's latest introductions from the 70-200 Mark II (ok, a few years old now), to the 24-70 Mark II, the 40 2.8 pancake, and the 35 2.0 IS have been impressively sharp wide open. Canon needs a 50 that's also sharp wide open and they don't have one.

Since "The Year of The Lens" is passing quickly, my hope is dwindling. So, for the first time, I've started to consider Sigma. I'm looking forward to the evolution of this thread.

+1, I am also waiting for a sharp wide open Canon 50mm and I want to indicate that I have owned all Canon 50's and I have not been happy with them. A new 50mm on par with the 35mm f2IS would be great or a renewed 50mm f1.2L.

 

[Marsu42]

You're actually asking if a €900 Sigma with 77mm from 2014 is an upgrade vs a €300 58mm Canon from 2005?

The Canon is from 1993.

Thanks, my mistake, I simply looked up the Amazon (sold since) line :-o ... it beat my imagination it's such an old lens.

I, too, am waiting for Canon to refresh the 50 1.4 with IS like they did with the 28 and 35.

Probably the very same reason why the 7d2 was delayed so long: They don't find a "sweet" performance/price spot in the market to compete with Sigma (like Nikon for cameras) without cannibalizing their own high-end lineup (the 50/1.2, like 7d2 vs. 5d3).

 

[raptor3x]

A renewed 50/1.4 may not even be "1.4" but rather "1.8" or "2.0" but with the addition of IS. Unless Canon wants to canabilize sales of the 50/1.2L, a newer 50mm from Canon won't have better IQ than the 50/1.2L and thus will not have better IQ than the Sigma.

I'm not sure that's a safe assumption. Canon's already set the precedent with the 70-200 f/4 IS and 16-35 f/4 IS of allowing a cheaper version of a lens to have better IQ.

 

[FTb-n]

A renewed 50/1.4 may not even be "1.4" but rather "1.8" or "2.0" but with the addition of IS. Unless Canon wants to canabilize sales of the 50/1.2L, a newer 50mm from Canon won't have better IQ than the 50/1.2L and thus will not have better IQ than the Sigma.

I'd love to see Canon refresh the 50 1.4, but I do suspect the next "consumer-grade" 50 with IS will be a 1.8.

Canon did introduce a new 35 2.0 IS that rivals their 35 1.4L (with both at f2.0). Open up the L version to 1.4 and it softens up a bit around the edges (which is fine since it's still sharp in the center). I don't use this prime enough to warrant buying the L-version, but I paid $600 for the new 2.0 IS. The 50 1.2L is in demand for its speed. I don't see a sharper 50 1.8 IS taking sales away from it.

Canon upgraded long favorite lenses like the 24-70 and the 70-200 with more expensive and sharper versions. So, why not also upgrade the rather soft 50 1.2L? This lens is a workhorse for wedding photographers during receptions. Many of these same photographers use the new 24-70 2.8 II for the rest of the wedding. This zoom is sharper than the 50 1.2L. I would think these photographers would jump at the chance to get a super fast 50 with the IQ of the 24-70 II. The demand has to be there for Canon to fill. On the flip side, maybe a slightly soft 50 1.2 is okay for people shots at a wedding.

Maybe there's two new Canon 50's in the works??